Analysis of speeches by Sadat and Bandler Essay

Custom Student Mr. Teacher ENG 1001-04 7 July 2017

Analysis of speeches by Sadat and Bandler

For a speech to be effective it must address the context and audience carefully, to overall successfully sustain a strong argument and purpose. Sadat’s”Statement to the Knesset” spoken in 1977 clearly shows a deep understanding to his politically intellectual audience through a thorough exordium to explain his purposes of bringing peace based on justice to Israel and Egypt, as well as additionally touching on the themes of political and religious unity as well as presenting the injustices of the past that have hindered this need for peace and reconciliation.

Similarly, Faith Bandler’s speech, “Faith, Hope and Reconciliation” spoken in 1999 at the Reconciliation Convention in Wollongong, shares similar values of unity, equality and peace, where an appeal to pathos is utilized to appeal to her audience and to overall present her argument that activism should be maintained in the future and the need to reconcile Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in order to revive hope.

Bandler uses her personal and historical context to familiarize with her audience, overall addressing her context and audience carefully. Ultimately, both speeches successfully address their similar type of audience in differing contexts, giving an effective speech with meaning and purpose. In both speeches, the reference of context is of major significance in creating a successful and effective address to the audience with meaning and purpose.

Sadat’s “Statement to the Knesset” was spoken in response to an invitation from the Jewish parliament which juxtaposes to the extraordinary context of the speech and Sadat’s own personal situation with the country of Israel. Sadat had been involved in many disputes with Israel, including the Six Day War against the country in 1967 as well as being responsible four years previous for initiating war on Egypt.

By addressing the Knesset, Sadat was in danger of assassination both in Israel and at home in Egypt as he was contravening Arab policy of refusing to deal publically with the Jewish state which was established in 1948. To reflect this historical and political context, Sadat opened in an emphatically religious way with an Islamic tone by stating “In the name of God, the Gracious and the merciful” before he even addresses his audience, to present a sense of religious unity among his audience.

This inclusion of all religions is also supported when Sadat says “we all Muslims, Christians and Jews worship God” creating a notion of inclusiveness and appealing to pathos to relate to his diverse audience. As well as this, Sadat establishes his purpose of peace based on justice and national unity through a detailed exordium which justifies his reasoning for speaking in Israel, which is “ to shape a new life, to establish peace” among Israeli and Arab citizens, reflecting the kairos of the speech, overall conveying the context.

Here Sadat is presented as a religious envoy and through an appeal to logos and pathos a sense of trust is built between him and his audience, therefore already presenting an effective speech. Similarly, Bandler’s historical and personal context is addressed in her speech, “Faith, Hope and Reconciliation”, as she appeals to ethos and relates herself to her multicultural audience at the convention when she states “I was once here before”, where her personal hardship is referred to when she was an activist.

Bandler is 79 years old and is at the end of her activism career after 50 years, so her colonial experience with the issues of reconciliation and unity are conveyed through a mournful tone and emotive diction in her exordium where she says the “terrible utterances” and “terrible tragedy” of “those who sponsored racism” made her feel “a little sadness”. The anaphora of “terrible” is used to highlight the injustices of the past and to allow the audience to sympathise to the hardships that were faced.

Bandler continues to establish her argument in the former half of her speech to her audience, by saying that “there are decent people out there” with “different cultures, different political beliefs” but “know there is a need to heal the wounds of the past”. Here the repetition of “different” is used to relate to her diverse context and audience, and coupled with positive diction and an appeal to ethos, an effective speech is forming due to Bandler’s careful address to context and audience.

Therefore, through careful consideration of audience and context each composer successfully allows for their speech to be effective. The theme of unity, politically and religiously, is clearly explored in both speeches through an appeal to audience and context, ultimately enabling them to be effective. Sadat conveys a notion of unity within his speech through frequent repetition of inclusive terms such as “I have come to you” and “let us be frank” which enables his to establish trust with the audience and be portrayed as a trusting, spiritual envoy.

An appeal to pathos and familiarity is also presented to his audience as within the speech’s context, Sadat is enabling his audience to sympathize with him as he feels it is “incumbent” of him to have come “to the farthest corner of the world” despite all the facts “surging on him” by the Knesset. Here the context is reflected as Sadat risked life and death within Israel and his homeland to come and speak to the Israeli government about “peace based upon justice”.

Sadat also conveys the theme of unity within his address when he references “Abraham – great grandfather of the Arabs and Jews”. Abraham to the Arabs and Jews is seen as a patriarchal symbol in both countries, which represents the inclusiveness of each country, overall allowing Sadat to establish himself once again as a peaceful and political envoy to the Knesset through his clever use of pathos and unity among his audience within the specific context of the speech.

Through this notion of unity within Sadat’s speech he is able to reiterate his purpose of coming to Israel and to justify his reasoning to speak to the Knesset, which overall was to establish “peace based on justice” between the two countries. Similarly, Bandler presents a sense of unity among her audience through her acknowledgement of her diverse and multicultural audience that when she states that they “may have different cultures, different political beliefs” but all share one view of supporting reconciliation.

Here Bandler reminds her audience of her purpose of her speech and through the repetition of “different” her careful address to context and audience is effectively shown. The theme of unity is additionally conveyed in Bandler’s speech through her use of colloquial language and appeal to ethos due to her personal hardships she has faced within the context of the speech, as she has just retired from 50 years of being an activist and fighting for reconciliation.

Bandler says “there’s a fair bit to do about” “lightening the burden of the terrible baggage” which reflects the colloquial, informal language she uses to relate to her audience but reminds them of her purpose at the same time, showing her effective address to her audience. Her appeal to ethos is seen in her exordium when she states that “she has been here once before” which represents her own colonial, personal experiences overall suiting the kairos of the address.

Again this appeal to ethos is reiterated in hr concluding paragraph where she says “dear friends” representing her familiarity with her context and audience, overall establishing a sense of trust and finally re-stating her point and linking it to the beginning of her speech, through a cyclical structure. Ultimately, a sense of unity is conveyed within both speeches, through a careful address to context and audience to enable their purpose to be established successfully.

The need for reconciliation and peace is a shared topic in both speeches, and through careful consideration of context and audience each speaker establishes their purpose and presents an effective speech by addressing the injustices of the past. In Sadat’s exordium he clearly poses his point that he will “go to the end of the world” in order to propose his purpose to his audience – “to shape new life, to establish peace”. Sadat frequently repeats the word “peace” throughout his address and due to this anaphorical phrase, he clearly justifies his intentions and emphasizes his purpose.

A notion of peace and reconciliation is also conveyed by Sadat within his speech to the Knesset as he references his historical context in a way that unifies his audience, showing his careful address to context and audience. Sadat states that “we are still bearing the consequences of four fierce wars waged within 30 years” and through use of logos to appeal to pathos he establishes peace through an acknowledgment of his context, ultimately emphasizing his purpose and creating familiarity with the Knesset.

Through reference to the injustices to the past, Sadat also reinforces the need for reconciliation, ultimately strengthening his argument. He says “Ladies and Gentleman…it is incumbent…to overlook the past, with all its complexities and weighing memories, in a bold drive towards new horizons” and through the positive diction of “new horizons” Sadat enlightens his audience to reconcile and to “achieve a durable peace upon justice”.

In the same way, Bandler speaks about the need to reconcile and make peace to her audience through the juxtaposition of past and present views, showing an address to her context, ultimately hoping to inspire her audience to look to the future and unify with each other. Throughout the ladder structured speech, Bandler frequently polarizes different views and opinions of two sets of people – those who are for reconciliation and those who are not – which overall emphasizes her point to the audience that “to move the process of reconciliation forward” it needs a “little more speed”.

For example, Bandler juxtaposes reconciliation activists as “decent people” who have “lived, breathed, struggled and climbed” to those who do not support the need to reconcile and who “close their eyes to the past…ignorance and blind…” and through this fluctuation in positive and negative diction between the two groups, the injustices of the past and present is shown.

The theme of reconciliation is also shown in the speech through Bandler’s use of dichotomy when she discusses the impact of the media and describes them as ”talk-back jockeys” “who are deliberately blinkered” and are “chained in their stubbornness” due to their views against peace and reconciliation today. This metaphor of horses shows the bias and one-sided nature some people have against the need to reconcile and through the animalistic imagery she uses, her argument is strengthened.

Overall, Bandler urges her audience for the need to revive hope and to find a common ground to overcome differences, and through an appeal to pathos by the end of her address she challenges her audience of this by stating “If not now, when? If not us, who? ”. This employment of rhetorical questions and hyperphora such as “What is reconciliation about? It is about promoting discussion” used at the end of her address emphasizes her argument and includes her audience intending that the modern generations are responsible for reconciliation for today and in the future.

Through this challenge to her audience, the textual integrity of the speech is shown as the themes of peace; reconciliation and unity are still relevant today despite the context bound nature of the topic and time. This contrasts to Sadat’s address as his speech is highly context bound due to the excessive amount of historical references used and because of Sadat’s situation at the time, modern audiences are less likely to fully grasp and resonate in the speech as much as those in 1977.

Ultimately, Bandler and Sadat address their differing audience and context carefully to present an effective speech. In conclusion, through the discussion of the thematical issues of religious/political unity as well as peace and reconciliation, both Sadat and Bandler’s speeches are effective due to careful consideration of context and audience.

As Sadat’s context is highly contextual to his specific situation at that time, his use of kairos and logos to his audience allows his speech to become effective as he reasons and justifies why he is coming to speak in Israel about the need to unify with Egypt. Similarly, Bandler’s use of pathos and personal context allows her audience to resonate with the issues of reconciliation and hope, overall presenting an effective speech.

Showing this effectiveness is the fact that each speech was received well in each of their contexts, due to the positive and uplifting tone used by Bandler and due to the courage and bravery Sadat showed when acknowledging the fact that Egypt was a state, showing the positive impact each address had upon their context of time. Ultimately, in order for a speech to be effective the composer must carefully address their audience and context and both Sadat and Bandler achieve this.

Free Analysis of speeches by Sadat and Bandler Essay Sample


  • Subject:

  • University/College: University of California

  • Type of paper: Thesis/Dissertation Chapter

  • Date: 7 July 2017

  • Words:

  • Pages:

Let us write you a custom essay sample on Analysis of speeches by Sadat and Bandler

for only $16.38 $13.9/page

your testimonials